1 00:00:00,600 --> 00:00:03,600 Speaker 1: Hey, Michael, since you're talking about self defense, just wanted 2 00:00:03,600 --> 00:00:06,320 Speaker 1: to share that I had an incident where somebody threatened me, 3 00:00:07,120 --> 00:00:10,119 Speaker 1: came within arm reach of me, and at that point 4 00:00:10,160 --> 00:00:12,320 Speaker 1: I was the one that laid hands on them. But 5 00:00:12,360 --> 00:00:15,600 Speaker 1: when the police showed up and I explained myself that 6 00:00:15,640 --> 00:00:18,520 Speaker 1: they told me they were going to hurt me and 7 00:00:19,079 --> 00:00:22,479 Speaker 1: invaded my space, the police decided I had acted in 8 00:00:22,520 --> 00:00:25,959 Speaker 1: self defense. Meanwhile, that person was sitting there crying that 9 00:00:26,040 --> 00:00:27,080 Speaker 1: they never touched me. 10 00:00:29,360 --> 00:00:34,720 Speaker 2: Great example, I took an uber to the studio today 11 00:00:34,840 --> 00:00:36,800 Speaker 2: so that somebody could pick me up and take me 12 00:00:36,960 --> 00:00:40,320 Speaker 2: to this stupid eye surgery. I have to do this afternoon, 13 00:00:41,200 --> 00:00:44,600 Speaker 2: and as usually happens, uber drivers you know, like to 14 00:00:44,640 --> 00:00:48,239 Speaker 2: start conversing, and turns out that. 15 00:00:48,200 --> 00:00:49,519 Speaker 3: We had some mutual friends. 16 00:00:51,080 --> 00:00:55,320 Speaker 2: So he asked me about the shooting, and then he 17 00:00:55,400 --> 00:01:00,640 Speaker 2: went on to explain that he was I think it 18 00:01:00,680 --> 00:01:03,480 Speaker 2: was downtown Denver. I don't remember if he told me 19 00:01:03,600 --> 00:01:06,320 Speaker 2: or I just don't remember how long ago this was, 20 00:01:07,240 --> 00:01:11,600 Speaker 2: but he was he lived in a high rise downtown 21 00:01:12,000 --> 00:01:15,880 Speaker 2: I don't know where. Wind's unimportant, and he was walking 22 00:01:16,160 --> 00:01:22,280 Speaker 2: and stealed caring and a kid front. Turns out he's 23 00:01:22,280 --> 00:01:26,160 Speaker 2: from Oklahoma. He had a warrant for his arrest or 24 00:01:26,360 --> 00:01:31,920 Speaker 2: some burglary charges or something, and as they start walking 25 00:01:32,120 --> 00:01:36,240 Speaker 2: toward each other on the street, he realizes the kid 26 00:01:36,360 --> 00:01:42,320 Speaker 2: is carrying like a samurai sword, and so he draws 27 00:01:42,360 --> 00:01:42,800 Speaker 2: his web. 28 00:01:42,920 --> 00:01:43,120 Speaker 4: You know. 29 00:01:43,200 --> 00:01:47,920 Speaker 2: The kids starting to move toward him rapidly, so he, 30 00:01:49,520 --> 00:01:53,520 Speaker 2: which is the key, perceives the threat. He perceives the danger, 31 00:01:54,000 --> 00:01:58,520 Speaker 2: so he draws his weapon. He brandishes his weapon, and 32 00:01:58,720 --> 00:02:00,800 Speaker 2: of course the kid freaks out. He tells the kid 33 00:02:00,840 --> 00:02:03,600 Speaker 2: to drop the sword. He drops the sword, gets the 34 00:02:03,680 --> 00:02:07,480 Speaker 2: kid on the ground, and holds him there while he 35 00:02:07,560 --> 00:02:14,880 Speaker 2: calls the cops. Nobody ever touched anybody, unless, of course, 36 00:02:14,880 --> 00:02:17,919 Speaker 2: he kept a foot on the kid's back or something 37 00:02:18,040 --> 00:02:20,639 Speaker 2: kept him down. But the kid was scared to death. 38 00:02:21,000 --> 00:02:26,320 Speaker 2: But again, it's the perception of the person who is 39 00:02:26,360 --> 00:02:31,320 Speaker 2: being threatened. It's not whether the sword was up like ah, 40 00:02:31,480 --> 00:02:36,760 Speaker 2: here I come. It's that he's approaching in a menacing fashion. 41 00:02:37,320 --> 00:02:40,120 Speaker 2: You perceive the threat, and you have the right to 42 00:02:40,160 --> 00:02:47,040 Speaker 2: defend yourself against the possibility, a reasonable possibility of severe 43 00:02:47,120 --> 00:02:48,400 Speaker 2: physical injury or death. 44 00:02:50,360 --> 00:02:51,920 Speaker 3: So you're spot on. 45 00:02:52,840 --> 00:02:55,960 Speaker 2: But I want to go back to the manifestations of 46 00:02:56,040 --> 00:03:02,040 Speaker 2: this latest decision by or threat put tim walls to 47 00:03:02,120 --> 00:03:06,400 Speaker 2: call out the National Guard. Now, on the ground, it 48 00:03:06,480 --> 00:03:11,840 Speaker 2: can manifest itself in a couple of ways. Guard units 49 00:03:12,360 --> 00:03:17,400 Speaker 2: could be positioned to keep protesters and ICE separated. Now, 50 00:03:17,440 --> 00:03:21,960 Speaker 2: the protesters would probably interpret that as a state government 51 00:03:22,120 --> 00:03:27,000 Speaker 2: endorsement of their presence, in which the federal law enforcement 52 00:03:27,160 --> 00:03:31,720 Speaker 2: agents would probably interpret as de facto interference with their operations. 53 00:03:32,080 --> 00:03:38,160 Speaker 2: So just having them there is an explosive, volatile situation, 54 00:03:38,800 --> 00:03:44,800 Speaker 2: and it shows that that politics. No rational thinking here, 55 00:03:46,000 --> 00:03:49,640 Speaker 2: no long term thinking, no looking around the corner, no 56 00:03:49,800 --> 00:03:54,400 Speaker 2: considering all of the consequences of your actions or your decisions, 57 00:03:54,520 --> 00:03:59,800 Speaker 2: or even your words, because they don't care. They don't care. 58 00:04:00,360 --> 00:04:05,080 Speaker 2: So that's the first manifestation. There's another one, though, what 59 00:04:05,160 --> 00:04:10,680 Speaker 2: about conflicting instructions. So let's say the federal law enforcement 60 00:04:10,720 --> 00:04:15,280 Speaker 2: officers order the crowd to disperse while the National Guard, 61 00:04:15,840 --> 00:04:19,919 Speaker 2: under their state rules of engagement, they're going to prioritize 62 00:04:20,400 --> 00:04:26,240 Speaker 2: non confrontation, creating confusion, split second risks, and now you've 63 00:04:26,279 --> 00:04:29,160 Speaker 2: got fertile ground for another flashpoint. 64 00:04:30,120 --> 00:04:31,560 Speaker 3: Conflicting instructions. 65 00:04:33,600 --> 00:04:37,479 Speaker 2: Now, while outright physical confrontation between the guards and ICE, 66 00:04:37,640 --> 00:04:44,520 Speaker 2: I think is unlikely. The mere perception that somehow Tim 67 00:04:44,560 --> 00:04:47,839 Speaker 2: Walls and his National Guard are buffering or shielding the 68 00:04:47,920 --> 00:04:53,240 Speaker 2: protesters from federal enforcement. That undermines the unity of command, 69 00:04:53,640 --> 00:04:59,039 Speaker 2: which is based on personal experience, is absolutely critical in 70 00:04:59,320 --> 00:05:01,480 Speaker 2: volatile public order situations. 71 00:05:02,360 --> 00:05:08,440 Speaker 3: Who's in charge Now clearly clearly. 72 00:05:10,040 --> 00:05:15,200 Speaker 2: In court, any direct attempt by Minnesota to obstruct or 73 00:05:15,320 --> 00:05:20,039 Speaker 2: to nullify federal immigration enforcement runs like a like a 74 00:05:20,600 --> 00:05:24,280 Speaker 2: speeding out of control tar into the supremacy clause of 75 00:05:24,320 --> 00:05:29,360 Speaker 2: the United States Constitution and along with that the preemption doctrine. 76 00:05:30,080 --> 00:05:32,679 Speaker 2: So when you have cases like Arizona versus the United 77 00:05:32,680 --> 00:05:38,560 Speaker 2: States that underscore that immigration enforcement is principally a federal 78 00:05:38,600 --> 00:05:42,680 Speaker 2: domain and the States cannot lawfully impede that. 79 00:05:44,839 --> 00:05:47,640 Speaker 3: So you can make a case. 80 00:05:47,960 --> 00:05:51,440 Speaker 2: I think that someone who's a governor of a state, 81 00:05:52,560 --> 00:05:54,280 Speaker 2: I don't know whether, I don't know if he's a 82 00:05:54,320 --> 00:05:57,920 Speaker 2: lawyer or not, but he's got an entire legal department. 83 00:05:58,320 --> 00:06:01,039 Speaker 2: He's got the legal department within the governor, and he's 84 00:06:01,040 --> 00:06:04,080 Speaker 2: got oh it's headed by Keith Ellison, but he's got 85 00:06:04,080 --> 00:06:07,120 Speaker 2: the Attorney General's office. He I'll be getting the advice 86 00:06:07,200 --> 00:06:09,680 Speaker 2: that says, wait, wait, wait a minute, you're setting up 87 00:06:09,680 --> 00:06:13,480 Speaker 2: a conflict here that not only is unconstitutional and illegal, 88 00:06:13,839 --> 00:06:20,000 Speaker 2: but you are precipitating a potential incitement and clash because 89 00:06:20,040 --> 00:06:22,800 Speaker 2: you're sending a signal that we're going to protect the 90 00:06:22,839 --> 00:06:26,400 Speaker 2: protesters who are already violated, who may or may not 91 00:06:26,440 --> 00:06:29,480 Speaker 2: be violating the law, depending on how they are protesting. 92 00:06:29,839 --> 00:06:33,159 Speaker 2: But if the protesters perceive, hey, we got the National 93 00:06:33,160 --> 00:06:35,920 Speaker 2: Guard on our side to protect us, then they're going 94 00:06:36,000 --> 00:06:38,520 Speaker 2: to be more likely than not to violate the law 95 00:06:38,800 --> 00:06:46,640 Speaker 2: by blockading streets. This is insanity, utter insanity. Now, if 96 00:06:46,680 --> 00:06:50,840 Speaker 2: Minnesota actually deploys the Guard or issue some local order 97 00:06:50,880 --> 00:06:54,120 Speaker 2: in a way that practically prevents ice from arresting individuals 98 00:06:54,279 --> 00:06:58,840 Speaker 2: who are obstructing or assaulting the officers, now the government 99 00:06:58,880 --> 00:07:02,560 Speaker 2: could go to court seek an injunction. They could argue 100 00:07:02,520 --> 00:07:06,880 Speaker 2: the interference with federal operations. They could explore litigation, or 101 00:07:06,920 --> 00:07:09,279 Speaker 2: they could you know, cut off funding. They could do 102 00:07:09,279 --> 00:07:14,120 Speaker 2: all sorts of things to compel cooperation, and then of 103 00:07:14,160 --> 00:07:18,000 Speaker 2: course you would have the inevitable civil lawsuits, particularly if 104 00:07:18,000 --> 00:07:22,240 Speaker 2: the protesters shielded by the city or the state injure 105 00:07:22,240 --> 00:07:26,000 Speaker 2: a federal cop, a federal law enforcement officer. Then those 106 00:07:26,280 --> 00:07:29,120 Speaker 2: officers or their families could assert the state and local 107 00:07:29,200 --> 00:07:33,000 Speaker 2: leader's actions, including all their rhetoric, all their operational decisions, 108 00:07:33,240 --> 00:07:36,240 Speaker 2: all that contributed to an unsafe environment, and then failed 109 00:07:36,240 --> 00:07:39,360 Speaker 2: to exercise reasonable care and maintaining public order. They would 110 00:07:39,400 --> 00:07:42,120 Speaker 2: pierce the veil a sovereign immunity, and you'd have lawsuits 111 00:07:42,120 --> 00:07:42,720 Speaker 2: out the galore. 112 00:07:44,240 --> 00:07:45,480 Speaker 3: But that's the base. 113 00:07:45,680 --> 00:07:50,200 Speaker 2: That's that's what I would call best case scenario, because again, 114 00:07:52,720 --> 00:08:00,040 Speaker 2: talk about a standoff the guard assuming they're armed and 115 00:08:00,200 --> 00:08:05,840 Speaker 2: that their weapons are operational and loaded. You know ice 116 00:08:05,960 --> 00:08:09,240 Speaker 2: is you know, well, we know from yesterday that the 117 00:08:09,280 --> 00:08:16,400 Speaker 2: weapons are loaded. Who fires the proverbial first shot and 118 00:08:16,440 --> 00:08:18,679 Speaker 2: then all hell breaks loose. 119 00:08:18,880 --> 00:08:23,480 Speaker 4: The Minneapolis Mayor has said that the presence of government 120 00:08:23,640 --> 00:08:30,160 Speaker 4: enforcement personnel is creating an unsafe situation. I wonder if 121 00:08:30,200 --> 00:08:34,480 Speaker 4: you'll say the same thing since Governor Walls is wanting 122 00:08:34,520 --> 00:08:35,760 Speaker 4: to send the National Guardian. 123 00:08:36,840 --> 00:08:42,640 Speaker 3: H it's a. 124 00:08:45,160 --> 00:08:51,160 Speaker 2: It's really an ugly, nasty, rotten stew of stuff in Minnesota. 125 00:08:53,080 --> 00:09:00,760 Speaker 2: The fraud. My bias is that Keith Ellison, Thettorney General, 126 00:09:01,200 --> 00:09:05,840 Speaker 2: the governor, certainly members of the governor's staff his executive team, 127 00:09:06,320 --> 00:09:09,960 Speaker 2: knew about the fraud. You can't have that amount of 128 00:09:09,960 --> 00:09:14,640 Speaker 2: fraud going on without somebody knowing about it, and in fact, 129 00:09:14,760 --> 00:09:22,440 Speaker 2: we have auditors pointing out that there were whistleblowers that 130 00:09:22,520 --> 00:09:28,800 Speaker 2: were ignored or terminated or very deep in the bureaucracy. 131 00:09:29,080 --> 00:09:32,319 Speaker 2: So you get that going on at the same time 132 00:09:32,440 --> 00:09:38,920 Speaker 2: that Minnesota's turned into this flash point about immigration. Shiny object, 133 00:09:40,040 --> 00:09:45,480 Speaker 2: you know, look over here, ignore all of this, And politically, 134 00:09:47,240 --> 00:09:51,600 Speaker 2: something that politicians tend to do is divert your attention, 135 00:09:53,320 --> 00:09:57,680 Speaker 2: and this gave them a very good diversion. But let's 136 00:09:57,720 --> 00:10:00,240 Speaker 2: go back to this idea about the National gold Guard 137 00:10:02,240 --> 00:10:06,720 Speaker 2: and federal law enforcement and how that might manifest itself 138 00:10:06,880 --> 00:10:12,480 Speaker 2: in the streets. Well, how does that intersect with the 139 00:10:12,600 --> 00:10:18,640 Speaker 2: narrative about the shooting of this woman yesterday? The mayor 140 00:10:18,679 --> 00:10:22,600 Speaker 2: and the governor's narratives portray the driver of that on 141 00:10:22,760 --> 00:10:26,559 Speaker 2: the pilot as a legal observer. Oh, just a neighbor 142 00:10:26,640 --> 00:10:31,640 Speaker 2: victimized by reckless federal power. That directly undermines the idea 143 00:10:32,200 --> 00:10:36,800 Speaker 2: that she was an obstructing driver whose vehicle movement created 144 00:10:36,840 --> 00:10:41,280 Speaker 2: a deadly threat to the officers during the break. See 145 00:10:41,280 --> 00:10:43,160 Speaker 2: how I still got it pulled up the Washington Post, 146 00:10:43,200 --> 00:10:44,719 Speaker 2: you know, because I read the Washington post, so you 147 00:10:44,760 --> 00:10:50,160 Speaker 2: don't have to. Here's their headline in their email. Ice 148 00:10:50,280 --> 00:10:53,240 Speaker 2: agent was not in the vehicle's path when he fired 149 00:10:53,240 --> 00:10:57,720 Speaker 2: the fatal shots. Comma video shows a frame by frame 150 00:10:57,720 --> 00:11:01,360 Speaker 2: analysis of video footage from Minneapolis. There's questions about claims 151 00:11:01,600 --> 00:11:05,280 Speaker 2: by President Trump and homestand Len's Homeland Security Secretary Christy Nome. 152 00:11:07,480 --> 00:11:10,960 Speaker 2: Most people won't read the story, and most people will 153 00:11:10,960 --> 00:11:13,800 Speaker 2: assume from that headline, oh wow, you know, yeah, of 154 00:11:13,800 --> 00:11:16,920 Speaker 2: course it's Ice and they're evil and so, yeah, they 155 00:11:17,040 --> 00:11:17,640 Speaker 2: just shot. 156 00:11:17,440 --> 00:11:18,240 Speaker 3: This innocent woman. 157 00:11:19,840 --> 00:11:25,080 Speaker 2: And what's interesting to me is the accompanying photos with 158 00:11:25,360 --> 00:11:30,920 Speaker 2: the story, because those are the photos that they're still shots, 159 00:11:31,720 --> 00:11:34,720 Speaker 2: probably frames taken out of the original videos that appeared 160 00:11:34,800 --> 00:11:39,840 Speaker 2: yesterday early on, and yes, from the very first one, 161 00:11:39,960 --> 00:11:43,160 Speaker 2: it looks like based on the perspective, it looks like 162 00:11:43,480 --> 00:11:47,600 Speaker 2: that she is turning away from the officer. As I 163 00:11:47,600 --> 00:11:49,400 Speaker 2: said before, it doesn't make any difference. He can't see 164 00:11:49,440 --> 00:11:52,280 Speaker 2: the tires. The car's in a forward motion. It's a 165 00:11:52,360 --> 00:11:56,200 Speaker 2: slick street. Even if whether she's slowly or whatever, she 166 00:11:56,400 --> 00:12:00,640 Speaker 2: runs the risk of that car slamming into him, and 167 00:12:00,679 --> 00:12:02,640 Speaker 2: indeed that's what happens. 168 00:12:03,320 --> 00:12:03,400 Speaker 3: Now. 169 00:12:03,440 --> 00:12:06,160 Speaker 2: I don't care whether us say it clipped him, it 170 00:12:06,320 --> 00:12:09,160 Speaker 2: nudged him, And I think that's trying to parse things, 171 00:12:09,559 --> 00:12:13,240 Speaker 2: and you're trying to be ambivalent and ambiguous, and you're 172 00:12:13,280 --> 00:12:16,000 Speaker 2: not willing to take a stance on what is really 173 00:12:16,040 --> 00:12:20,439 Speaker 2: observed in that final video that's taken. What I'm going 174 00:12:20,480 --> 00:12:24,439 Speaker 2: to assume is from someone's upper bedroom window on that 175 00:12:24,520 --> 00:12:27,320 Speaker 2: block who's videoing everything going on the street out in 176 00:12:27,320 --> 00:12:31,720 Speaker 2: front of their house. There's a tree that slightly You've 177 00:12:31,760 --> 00:12:34,080 Speaker 2: got to really watch, but you can see where the 178 00:12:34,200 --> 00:12:38,679 Speaker 2: vehicle does indeed hit the officer who was in front 179 00:12:38,720 --> 00:12:40,880 Speaker 2: of the vehicle. So the Washington Post is just lying, 180 00:12:41,840 --> 00:12:45,480 Speaker 2: and they're lying by omission by not going to the 181 00:12:45,760 --> 00:12:48,360 Speaker 2: entirety of the story, and anybody else that tells you 182 00:12:48,400 --> 00:12:50,160 Speaker 2: otherwise is doing exactly the same thing. 183 00:12:52,080 --> 00:12:54,160 Speaker 3: So when we get back, I want to continue. 184 00:12:53,840 --> 00:12:58,319 Speaker 2: About how does all of this National Guard and federal 185 00:12:58,400 --> 00:13:03,440 Speaker 2: law enforcement, how does that intersect with what really happened. 186 00:13:04,200 --> 00:13:07,400 Speaker 2: So if we have the guard called up by the governor, 187 00:13:08,040 --> 00:13:09,640 Speaker 2: did the President call up the guard? 188 00:13:10,480 --> 00:13:12,680 Speaker 3: If the President called up the guard, would it be 189 00:13:12,800 --> 00:13:13,880 Speaker 3: conflicting orders? 190 00:13:14,280 --> 00:13:15,480 Speaker 2: What it go? 191 00:13:16,800 --> 00:13:18,960 Speaker 4: I'm gonna start looking like that Spider Man meme where 192 00:13:18,960 --> 00:13:20,120 Speaker 4: they're all pointing at each other. 193 00:13:21,160 --> 00:13:23,920 Speaker 3: That's exactly right, drag and dot. 194 00:13:23,920 --> 00:13:26,640 Speaker 2: We have our we have our own text line, right, 195 00:13:26,800 --> 00:13:29,600 Speaker 2: isn't that three three one zero three Yeah, three three. 196 00:13:29,520 --> 00:13:31,720 Speaker 3: One o three the text micro Michael three three one 197 00:13:31,720 --> 00:13:32,640 Speaker 3: o three Yeah. 198 00:13:32,720 --> 00:13:34,880 Speaker 2: I just want to remind people of that because I 199 00:13:34,920 --> 00:13:37,080 Speaker 2: don't see the other text line. I don't I couldn't 200 00:13:37,080 --> 00:13:38,679 Speaker 2: even tell you what the pastor. I don't think I 201 00:13:38,720 --> 00:13:41,000 Speaker 2: have to log into it anymore. Oh, thank good. 202 00:13:41,440 --> 00:13:44,800 Speaker 3: Yeah. So if you why you say that, no reason, 203 00:13:45,920 --> 00:13:47,640 Speaker 3: because if you if you want me to see. 204 00:13:47,480 --> 00:13:51,200 Speaker 2: Your text three three one zero three keyword mic or Michael. 205 00:13:51,520 --> 00:13:57,120 Speaker 2: All right, let's think about incitement for a moment, because 206 00:13:57,160 --> 00:14:00,720 Speaker 2: it's a very narrow it's a high bar categorylory of 207 00:14:01,000 --> 00:14:06,680 Speaker 2: unprotected speech, and the standard for incitement is the same 208 00:14:06,840 --> 00:14:11,719 Speaker 2: for a government official as it is for you and me, everybody. 209 00:14:12,200 --> 00:14:16,200 Speaker 2: The core case is Brandenburg versus Ohio. It's called the 210 00:14:16,200 --> 00:14:20,160 Speaker 2: brandon Burg test. For speech to qualify as a criminal 211 00:14:20,160 --> 00:14:23,520 Speaker 2: incitement and thus lose any protection from the First Amendment. 212 00:14:23,560 --> 00:14:25,200 Speaker 3: You've got to meet three elements. 213 00:14:26,600 --> 00:14:31,400 Speaker 2: The speaker intends to incite or produce unlawful action. Now, 214 00:14:31,840 --> 00:14:35,400 Speaker 2: let's just think about that for a moment. Intention is 215 00:14:35,440 --> 00:14:40,040 Speaker 2: going to be somewhat difficult to prove, but intention can 216 00:14:40,080 --> 00:14:43,640 Speaker 2: be proven by the totality of all the circumstances, by 217 00:14:43,680 --> 00:14:48,760 Speaker 2: the tone, by the words used, by the effect that 218 00:14:49,240 --> 00:14:53,960 Speaker 2: a reasonable person would expect those words or that speech 219 00:14:54,200 --> 00:14:58,080 Speaker 2: to produce. So the speaker intends to incite or produce 220 00:14:58,160 --> 00:15:01,720 Speaker 2: unlawful action. I could make an argument, I believe, a 221 00:15:01,800 --> 00:15:07,080 Speaker 2: rational argument, that calling out the Minnesota National Guard to 222 00:15:07,320 --> 00:15:14,840 Speaker 2: protect protesters is encouraging the protesters. Why well, because if 223 00:15:14,880 --> 00:15:18,400 Speaker 2: you particularly now, because you can't just do it in isolation. 224 00:15:19,280 --> 00:15:24,600 Speaker 2: So you had a protester that was, in my legal opinion, 225 00:15:25,080 --> 00:15:31,040 Speaker 2: lawfully killed by law enforcement because she threatened them, and 226 00:15:31,120 --> 00:15:33,080 Speaker 2: now you're going to call it base and based on that, 227 00:15:33,080 --> 00:15:35,080 Speaker 2: you're going to call off the National Guard to protect 228 00:15:35,120 --> 00:15:36,960 Speaker 2: all these other protesters that we saw on the street 229 00:15:37,000 --> 00:15:40,920 Speaker 2: that day. So you are encouraging them to get in 230 00:15:41,000 --> 00:15:43,600 Speaker 2: their car and block roads because that's what she was doing. 231 00:15:45,120 --> 00:15:47,640 Speaker 2: So I think that, yes, that it could meet at 232 00:15:47,760 --> 00:15:51,760 Speaker 2: least the first standard of the Brandenburg test. Then you 233 00:15:51,760 --> 00:15:57,240 Speaker 2: have the second standard. The unlawful action is imminent, not 234 00:15:57,360 --> 00:16:01,280 Speaker 2: some vague distant future wrongdoing. It has to be imminent. Well, 235 00:16:01,320 --> 00:16:03,320 Speaker 2: if you call out the National Guard today, I think 236 00:16:03,360 --> 00:16:06,480 Speaker 2: that just by per se meets the definition of imminent 237 00:16:06,840 --> 00:16:11,840 Speaker 2: the unlawful action. You've got protesters, I'm assuming. Let me 238 00:16:11,880 --> 00:16:15,000 Speaker 2: look at the TV. Oh yeah, well they're showing they're 239 00:16:15,000 --> 00:16:18,560 Speaker 2: showing pictures now over on Fox anyway of protesters out 240 00:16:18,560 --> 00:16:24,480 Speaker 2: on the streets. So it's going on, So it is imminent. 241 00:16:25,560 --> 00:16:29,240 Speaker 2: Then the third element, the speech is likely to produce 242 00:16:30,120 --> 00:16:35,360 Speaker 2: that imminent lawlessness action. In the totality of all the circumstances, 243 00:16:37,240 --> 00:16:38,240 Speaker 2: I think we've met all three. 244 00:16:39,200 --> 00:16:39,360 Speaker 4: Now. 245 00:16:39,400 --> 00:16:42,480 Speaker 2: If any one of those is missing, there's no specific thread, 246 00:16:42,520 --> 00:16:45,480 Speaker 2: there's no eminence, there's no real likelihood that the crowd 247 00:16:45,520 --> 00:16:49,240 Speaker 2: would act immediately, then that speech would remain protected even 248 00:16:49,280 --> 00:16:52,360 Speaker 2: if it's reckless. You can say things that are reckless. 249 00:16:52,600 --> 00:16:55,080 Speaker 2: You can say things that are inflammatory. I think both 250 00:16:55,080 --> 00:16:58,400 Speaker 2: sides have been saying things that are inflammatory. You can 251 00:16:58,480 --> 00:17:04,080 Speaker 2: even glorify the law break Oh yeah, you know. But 252 00:17:04,119 --> 00:17:07,760 Speaker 2: when you do it to incite or produce that action, 253 00:17:08,800 --> 00:17:12,520 Speaker 2: and the action is going to occur emminently, and the 254 00:17:12,560 --> 00:17:16,399 Speaker 2: speech that you're doing is likely to produce that action, 255 00:17:17,119 --> 00:17:19,959 Speaker 2: then you're not protected by the First Amendment, and that's incitement. 256 00:17:21,680 --> 00:17:25,080 Speaker 2: So if you advocate law breaking or a general call 257 00:17:25,160 --> 00:17:29,040 Speaker 2: to resistance, or just heated rhetoric about some injustice that 258 00:17:29,080 --> 00:17:32,600 Speaker 2: you're really, you know, pissed off about, that's protected so 259 00:17:32,720 --> 00:17:34,959 Speaker 2: long as you're not directing it trying to produce an 260 00:17:34,960 --> 00:17:39,200 Speaker 2: immediate unlawful act. And the course of distinguished incitement from 261 00:17:39,480 --> 00:17:44,280 Speaker 2: what's true threats from generic hate speech. Incitement is about 262 00:17:44,440 --> 00:17:47,520 Speaker 2: urging others in the context which we have to take 263 00:17:47,600 --> 00:17:51,480 Speaker 2: into context, all the circumstances since yesterday, to commit a 264 00:17:51,520 --> 00:17:56,879 Speaker 2: specific unlawful act right now or very soon now. Historically, 265 00:17:57,359 --> 00:18:00,600 Speaker 2: the Supreme Court has moved from the older what they 266 00:18:00,640 --> 00:18:04,400 Speaker 2: called the clear and present danger approach to the stricter 267 00:18:04,760 --> 00:18:08,359 Speaker 2: Brandenburg standard, so that kind of narrowed government power to 268 00:18:08,400 --> 00:18:17,200 Speaker 2: punish advocacy. But what I find interesting is, as someone 269 00:18:17,240 --> 00:18:20,840 Speaker 2: who understands the Brandenburg Test and the case all this 270 00:18:21,000 --> 00:18:25,840 Speaker 2: developed around it, this nudge is right up to the line, 271 00:18:26,800 --> 00:18:31,159 Speaker 2: and I think a sharp lawyer can make an argument 272 00:18:31,200 --> 00:18:34,040 Speaker 2: that it meets all three elements of the Brandenburg Test. 273 00:18:37,080 --> 00:18:41,960 Speaker 2: If I had been governor, I would have never threatened 274 00:18:41,960 --> 00:18:45,560 Speaker 2: to call out the National Guard in opposition to federal 275 00:18:45,600 --> 00:18:48,320 Speaker 2: law enforcement without at least sitting down and getting some 276 00:18:48,400 --> 00:18:51,880 Speaker 2: legal advice, even as a lawyer myself, sit down and say, 277 00:18:51,920 --> 00:18:57,880 Speaker 2: wait a minute, you know a lawyer worst client is himself. Yes, 278 00:18:58,119 --> 00:19:01,680 Speaker 2: get somebody else to advise you. Now, there's some key 279 00:19:01,680 --> 00:19:04,800 Speaker 2: things I want you to understand that limit the concept 280 00:19:04,840 --> 00:19:09,840 Speaker 2: of incitement. That's like mere advocacy of law breaking, because 281 00:19:09,880 --> 00:19:12,600 Speaker 2: the courts will distinguish between what is a true threat 282 00:19:12,960 --> 00:19:16,800 Speaker 2: from what I said was the historic hate speech, and 283 00:19:16,840 --> 00:19:19,080 Speaker 2: it's no longer just a clear and present danger. It's 284 00:19:19,400 --> 00:19:23,880 Speaker 2: it's this three pronged tests. And government officials are not protected. 285 00:19:23,920 --> 00:19:26,040 Speaker 2: They don't have any they don't have any exemption from this. 286 00:19:27,240 --> 00:19:31,000 Speaker 2: But when when a government official speaks, or they speak 287 00:19:31,080 --> 00:19:35,080 Speaker 2: in contexts where they know their supporters are likely to 288 00:19:35,160 --> 00:19:39,199 Speaker 2: act on their words, then questions about their intent and 289 00:19:39,240 --> 00:19:44,280 Speaker 2: the likelihood of imminent responses becomes very fact intendsy, and 290 00:19:44,440 --> 00:19:48,040 Speaker 2: an investigator would look at the specific language, the timing, 291 00:19:48,119 --> 00:19:52,080 Speaker 2: the audience, all the surrounding circumstances in order to decide 292 00:19:52,080 --> 00:19:55,560 Speaker 2: whether the Brandenburg elements are met. So, in practice, that 293 00:19:55,600 --> 00:19:58,560 Speaker 2: means that even highly irresponsible or even what I would 294 00:19:58,560 --> 00:20:03,040 Speaker 2: consider to be morally prehensible or inflammatory statements by mayor's 295 00:20:03,080 --> 00:20:07,400 Speaker 2: governor's presidents usually remain constitutionally protected. 296 00:20:08,400 --> 00:20:10,480 Speaker 3: They have to cross the. 297 00:20:10,640 --> 00:20:15,399 Speaker 2: Very specific line of urging imminent unlawful acts in a 298 00:20:15,560 --> 00:20:19,960 Speaker 2: way that is reasonably likely to make those acts occur. 299 00:20:23,240 --> 00:20:27,160 Speaker 2: So when you call out the national Guard in response 300 00:20:27,200 --> 00:20:30,720 Speaker 2: to federal action, have you ever thought about the history 301 00:20:30,760 --> 00:20:35,600 Speaker 2: of that, Because we have a long history of liberal 302 00:20:36,119 --> 00:20:43,120 Speaker 2: state national guard versus federal agents firefights, and there are 303 00:20:43,200 --> 00:20:47,200 Speaker 2: important precedents where governors use guard forces in opposition to 304 00:20:47,240 --> 00:20:50,560 Speaker 2: federal policy or presence, and the federal government ultimately prevails 305 00:20:51,160 --> 00:20:54,919 Speaker 2: because they assert the constitutional supremacy clause and when necessary, 306 00:20:55,000 --> 00:20:58,119 Speaker 2: they'll just as the talk back said, We'll just go 307 00:20:58,200 --> 00:21:01,720 Speaker 2: federalize the same guard units, and the supremacy cause would 308 00:21:01,760 --> 00:21:04,960 Speaker 2: allow the president to do that. So all of these 309 00:21:05,000 --> 00:21:12,320 Speaker 2: words from from Tim Walls, big ass nothing Berger Little 310 00:21:12,400 --> 00:21:18,679 Speaker 2: Rock nineteen fifty seven, Governor Fabus used the Arkansas National 311 00:21:18,680 --> 00:21:21,760 Speaker 2: Guard tried to block those black students, the Little Rock 312 00:21:21,840 --> 00:21:25,080 Speaker 2: nine as they were known, from entering that high I 313 00:21:25,080 --> 00:21:28,120 Speaker 2: think it was called Central High School. He was directly 314 00:21:28,119 --> 00:21:34,160 Speaker 2: defining federal desegregation orders. So President Eisenhower, he issued executive 315 00:21:34,280 --> 00:21:40,359 Speaker 2: order I don't remember that federalized the Arkansas Guard. He 316 00:21:40,480 --> 00:21:44,400 Speaker 2: sent in the one hundred and first Airborne, and once federalized, 317 00:21:44,560 --> 00:21:47,560 Speaker 2: the Guard shifted from opposing integration to now enforcing to 318 00:21:47,640 --> 00:21:53,840 Speaker 2: under federal command. Hey, Mark Kelly, is that disobeying an 319 00:21:53,960 --> 00:21:57,840 Speaker 2: unlawful order because you were sent there? I'm not saying, Mark, 320 00:21:58,000 --> 00:22:02,200 Speaker 2: I'm just saying because of you know Jason Crowe, neither 321 00:22:02,200 --> 00:22:04,040 Speaker 2: of whom I don't think are members the National Guard. 322 00:22:04,400 --> 00:22:08,160 Speaker 2: But in context of you can disobey a non lawful order, 323 00:22:09,480 --> 00:22:11,040 Speaker 2: I'd like to ask them, what would you have done 324 00:22:11,920 --> 00:22:14,000 Speaker 2: if you've been in Little Rock in nineteen fifty seven. 325 00:22:15,000 --> 00:22:17,479 Speaker 2: I think that is the clearest precedent of a governor 326 00:22:17,520 --> 00:22:21,399 Speaker 2: deploying guard forces against a federal legal objective and the 327 00:22:21,440 --> 00:22:27,080 Speaker 2: president essentially saying, hold my beer. Old Miss nineteen sixty two. 328 00:22:28,160 --> 00:22:30,960 Speaker 2: There were riots at Old Miss in nineteen sixty two 329 00:22:31,359 --> 00:22:35,159 Speaker 2: because Mississippi government officials were trying to resist the enrollment 330 00:22:35,240 --> 00:22:40,320 Speaker 2: of James Meredith despite a federal court order, and a 331 00:22:40,440 --> 00:22:44,920 Speaker 2: violent segregationist mob attacked federal Marsius Marshalls on the campus. 332 00:22:45,480 --> 00:22:49,080 Speaker 2: So President Kennedy deployed federal troops ultimately brought the Mississippi 333 00:22:49,119 --> 00:22:52,200 Speaker 2: National Guard under federal control to restore order and carry 334 00:22:52,200 --> 00:22:56,119 Speaker 2: out desegregation. Here again, once again we see that state 335 00:22:56,119 --> 00:23:00,120 Speaker 2: aligned resistance to a federal mandate, a federal law. In fact, 336 00:23:00,160 --> 00:23:03,600 Speaker 2: you just put a fine point about federal law. We're 337 00:23:03,600 --> 00:23:08,480 Speaker 2: talking about immigration law now. Dragon and I are factually 338 00:23:08,560 --> 00:23:13,040 Speaker 2: unsure whether they had completed ICE, had completed their mission 339 00:23:13,400 --> 00:23:16,120 Speaker 2: on that particular street at that time or somewhere nearby, 340 00:23:16,680 --> 00:23:19,480 Speaker 2: because some reports are that they had already found the 341 00:23:19,520 --> 00:23:21,960 Speaker 2: dirt bag they were looking for the criminal who happened 342 00:23:21,960 --> 00:23:24,480 Speaker 2: to be an illegal alien, and had already taken him 343 00:23:24,480 --> 00:23:27,680 Speaker 2: into custody. That may or may not be true, but 344 00:23:27,720 --> 00:23:30,960 Speaker 2: it's immaterial. I find it interesting because it really does 345 00:23:31,080 --> 00:23:37,719 Speaker 2: line up with they are trying to impede their lawful orders, 346 00:23:38,440 --> 00:23:44,280 Speaker 2: immigration orders, which are in the primarily almost exclusive domain 347 00:23:44,600 --> 00:23:50,120 Speaker 2: of the federal government. So when you think about supremacy, 348 00:23:50,160 --> 00:23:54,240 Speaker 2: the Insurrection Act and Guard status, the supremacy clause makes 349 00:23:54,359 --> 00:23:59,440 Speaker 2: valid federal law and constitutional rulings superior to any conflicting 350 00:23:59,480 --> 00:24:02,880 Speaker 2: state law or a state order. So Tim Walls can 351 00:24:02,920 --> 00:24:04,960 Speaker 2: go out and talk all he wants to about how 352 00:24:05,000 --> 00:24:06,600 Speaker 2: I'm going to call it the National Guard and blah 353 00:24:06,640 --> 00:24:11,520 Speaker 2: blah blah blah. Once the Guard's federalized, it's no longer 354 00:24:11,520 --> 00:24:17,520 Speaker 2: a state tool, and that tool, now federalized, can't be 355 00:24:17,680 --> 00:24:21,400 Speaker 2: used by a governor to oppose or buffer those federal agents. 356 00:24:21,680 --> 00:24:24,520 Speaker 2: It becomes actually a part of the federal force package 357 00:24:24,680 --> 00:24:27,720 Speaker 2: that's carrying out national policy. 358 00:24:27,840 --> 00:24:29,880 Speaker 3: He really is an idiot. 359 00:24:31,040 --> 00:24:34,040 Speaker 2: We can make fun of him all day long, but seriously, 360 00:24:34,400 --> 00:24:38,520 Speaker 2: the guy's neber than a box of rocks. So what 361 00:24:39,040 --> 00:24:41,800 Speaker 2: there's some modern implication. Let's forget nineteen fifty seven to 362 00:24:41,840 --> 00:24:50,159 Speaker 2: nineteen sixty two. There's recent scholarship on federalism and enforcement 363 00:24:50,440 --> 00:24:53,879 Speaker 2: stresses that states can direct their own policing guard forces 364 00:24:54,320 --> 00:24:59,280 Speaker 2: not to assist federal operations. We see that in sanctuary 365 00:24:59,280 --> 00:25:02,200 Speaker 2: cities where they hel cops. You can't, you can't cooperate. 366 00:25:03,240 --> 00:25:06,760 Speaker 2: But here's the key, and what many people don't get 367 00:25:06,760 --> 00:25:10,840 Speaker 2: to the second part of that they can't actively interfere 368 00:25:10,880 --> 00:25:15,320 Speaker 2: with those agents that are executing valid federal law. So yeah, 369 00:25:15,359 --> 00:25:18,480 Speaker 2: the Denver Police Department, mayor Johnson can just tell them, hey, 370 00:25:19,119 --> 00:25:23,120 Speaker 2: don't go do any traffic control, don't go do anything, 371 00:25:23,440 --> 00:25:28,000 Speaker 2: just leave them on their own. And unfortunately courts has said, yeah, 372 00:25:28,040 --> 00:25:31,119 Speaker 2: you don't have to cooperate with them. But what you 373 00:25:31,240 --> 00:25:35,040 Speaker 2: can't do is interfere with them. So if a governor 374 00:25:35,080 --> 00:25:37,560 Speaker 2: attempted to deploy a state controlled guard in a way 375 00:25:37,600 --> 00:25:42,359 Speaker 2: that materrely obstructs a federal operation, like by preventing ICE 376 00:25:42,440 --> 00:25:46,920 Speaker 2: or US marshals from arresting a targeted individual. But then 377 00:25:46,960 --> 00:25:49,360 Speaker 2: you go back to nineteen fifty seven to nineteen sixty two, 378 00:25:50,240 --> 00:25:53,080 Speaker 2: and the federal response then would probably follow the little 379 00:25:53,160 --> 00:25:56,840 Speaker 2: rock hole miss pattern see cooperation first and then if necessary, 380 00:25:56,920 --> 00:25:59,840 Speaker 2: federalize the guard and assert the supremacy clause in court, 381 00:26:00,119 --> 00:26:04,119 Speaker 2: and the governor's left holding it an empty bag. So 382 00:26:04,320 --> 00:26:08,440 Speaker 2: history shows that state federal friction around the National Guard 383 00:26:08,440 --> 00:26:11,640 Speaker 2: and the deployment of the National Guard gets resolved by 384 00:26:12,160 --> 00:26:17,040 Speaker 2: reaffirming federal primacy. All the governors can posture, they can delay, 385 00:26:17,320 --> 00:26:22,880 Speaker 2: they can complicate, but when a direct collision arises between 386 00:26:23,720 --> 00:26:30,040 Speaker 2: state guard orders and a national or federal mission, the Constitution, 387 00:26:30,240 --> 00:26:33,840 Speaker 2: the supremacy clause, and the president's power to federalize the 388 00:26:33,920 --> 00:26:39,760 Speaker 2: guard gives the president the final word, as it should be. 389 00:26:39,880 --> 00:26:48,240 Speaker 2: I would add, simply as it should be. The fatal 390 00:26:48,240 --> 00:26:54,560 Speaker 2: shooting of this woman crystallizes I think fundamental disagreements about 391 00:26:54,600 --> 00:26:58,520 Speaker 2: immigration enforcement in this country. Those of us like me 392 00:26:58,680 --> 00:27:02,679 Speaker 2: that support robust border security and immigration law enforcement. I 393 00:27:02,840 --> 00:27:07,159 Speaker 2: view this incident as illustrating several critical fault lines in 394 00:27:07,200 --> 00:27:12,680 Speaker 2: OURA civic life. There's an enforcement divide. Supporters like me. 395 00:27:13,600 --> 00:27:16,680 Speaker 2: I would argue that the Minneapolis incident reveals a really 396 00:27:16,720 --> 00:27:19,639 Speaker 2: stark division between Americans who believe that the law should 397 00:27:19,640 --> 00:27:22,680 Speaker 2: be in force and those who actively went to impede 398 00:27:22,840 --> 00:27:30,200 Speaker 2: federal law enforcement officers from carrying out federal statute, federal rules, regulations, policies. 399 00:27:30,880 --> 00:27:33,919 Speaker 2: So when ICE agents attempted to conduct the operations, the 400 00:27:33,960 --> 00:27:36,639 Speaker 2: woman had reportedly been following and impeding the officers throughout 401 00:27:36,680 --> 00:27:46,800 Speaker 2: the entire day, according to CNN. Proponents of enforcement I 402 00:27:46,800 --> 00:27:50,840 Speaker 2: would point to the immediate response from Minnesota officials as 403 00:27:51,000 --> 00:27:54,560 Speaker 2: evidence of that divide. The governor stated he had been 404 00:27:54,600 --> 00:27:58,479 Speaker 2: warning for weeks that ICE operations in the state were 405 00:27:58,520 --> 00:28:02,240 Speaker 2: a threat to public safety, and then when the mayor 406 00:28:02,680 --> 00:28:04,560 Speaker 2: told feder Way just to get the you know what 407 00:28:04,640 --> 00:28:11,800 Speaker 2: out of Minneapolis. Those favoring enforcement see legitimately that rhetoric 408 00:28:11,800 --> 00:28:17,240 Speaker 2: from elected officials as undermining the Constitution and is encouraging 409 00:28:17,320 --> 00:28:22,000 Speaker 2: citizens to resist lawful operations. They've taken it out of 410 00:28:22,119 --> 00:28:26,760 Speaker 2: the halls of the first branch of government of the Congress. 411 00:28:27,080 --> 00:28:30,040 Speaker 2: They've taken it out of the second branch, the executive branch, 412 00:28:30,560 --> 00:28:34,440 Speaker 2: and they've taken our conflicts, and they've put those conflicts 413 00:28:34,920 --> 00:28:40,200 Speaker 2: on the street. Why do I describe it that way? 414 00:28:40,960 --> 00:28:46,400 Speaker 2: That's the seeds of a Cloward Piven strategy designed to 415 00:28:46,520 --> 00:28:49,360 Speaker 2: evoke what they see in their minds, in their adult, 416 00:28:49,400 --> 00:28:55,120 Speaker 2: stupid little brains. As a revolution, I've not used that 417 00:28:55,280 --> 00:28:58,320 Speaker 2: word once in more than two and a half hours. 418 00:28:59,000 --> 00:29:04,040 Speaker 2: But that's ultimately where we get to a revolution. It's 419 00:29:04,080 --> 00:29:08,880 Speaker 2: the erosion of the rule of law. From an enforcement perspective, 420 00:29:09,760 --> 00:29:13,000 Speaker 2: what's really concerning is how quickly local and state officials 421 00:29:13,280 --> 00:29:16,680 Speaker 2: disputed the federal account of events. They just jumped right in. 422 00:29:17,800 --> 00:29:20,640 Speaker 2: At least even little old talk show hosts me spent 423 00:29:20,720 --> 00:29:23,600 Speaker 2: the entire afternoon and evening digging through and looking and 424 00:29:23,640 --> 00:29:27,120 Speaker 2: looking and looking. Before I said anything on X and 425 00:29:27,160 --> 00:29:29,640 Speaker 2: certainly before I came in here and said anything, they 426 00:29:29,760 --> 00:29:33,240 Speaker 2: jumped immediately to conclusions, which, by the way, you want 427 00:29:33,240 --> 00:29:37,080 Speaker 2: to jump back to the Brandenburg Test, I think that 428 00:29:37,080 --> 00:29:39,160 Speaker 2: would be one of the circumstances that shows that they 429 00:29:39,200 --> 00:29:44,240 Speaker 2: were intentionally trying to incite problems. They didn't wait. They 430 00:29:44,240 --> 00:29:47,000 Speaker 2: didn't say, hey, let's have an investigation. Oh, this is 431 00:29:47,040 --> 00:29:51,520 Speaker 2: a tragic incident, let's find out what really happened. Even 432 00:29:51,600 --> 00:29:55,040 Speaker 2: like some of you who have said earlier in the 433 00:29:55,080 --> 00:29:57,840 Speaker 2: program on the text line, why didn't he just shoot 434 00:29:57,840 --> 00:30:07,640 Speaker 2: the tires out? That shows a naive, a fantasy based 435 00:30:07,760 --> 00:30:14,560 Speaker 2: life of not the real world. Waltz went out playing 436 00:30:14,640 --> 00:30:17,480 Speaker 2: that all of this was unprecedented, that the federal government 437 00:30:17,480 --> 00:30:21,240 Speaker 2: has already determined what happened in the shooting. Yet supporters 438 00:30:21,760 --> 00:30:24,680 Speaker 2: would say that federal officials have access to evidence and 439 00:30:24,720 --> 00:30:30,080 Speaker 2: training records that inform their preliminary assessments. The immediate mobilization 440 00:30:30,160 --> 00:30:34,160 Speaker 2: of protests, and the characterization of ice as killers before 441 00:30:34,200 --> 00:30:38,760 Speaker 2: any investigation concludes. That represents, in my view, of prejudgment, 442 00:30:38,800 --> 00:30:42,440 Speaker 2: that assumes that federal officers are guilty. And that's what 443 00:30:42,480 --> 00:30:45,560 Speaker 2: the cabal, that's what the dominant media, the Washington Post 444 00:30:45,600 --> 00:30:46,800 Speaker 2: and the others want you to think. 445 00:30:47,040 --> 00:30:47,160 Speaker 3: Now. 446 00:30:47,160 --> 00:30:50,200 Speaker 2: I know that you don't think that, but there are 447 00:30:50,200 --> 00:30:55,400 Speaker 2: plenty of useful idiots that do. It's the same concept 448 00:30:55,920 --> 00:30:59,000 Speaker 2: as I don't care what the view says, I don't 449 00:30:59,040 --> 00:31:01,880 Speaker 2: care what the ladies at were. What in aim idiotic 450 00:31:01,960 --> 00:31:06,080 Speaker 2: things that Boope and all the rest of them say, 451 00:31:06,240 --> 00:31:07,959 Speaker 2: I don't care, Joe, and they can say whatever they 452 00:31:07,960 --> 00:31:11,680 Speaker 2: want to say. I'm more concerned about the useful it's 453 00:31:11,720 --> 00:31:16,960 Speaker 2: in the audience that take it as gospel. If you're 454 00:31:17,000 --> 00:31:22,800 Speaker 2: concerned about immigration policy, you can argue that the response 455 00:31:22,840 --> 00:31:27,600 Speaker 2: to this incident fit's in with a broader pattern of 456 00:31:27,640 --> 00:31:32,560 Speaker 2: creating crisis that is intended to stress our government institutions. 457 00:31:33,200 --> 00:31:38,120 Speaker 2: The welfare fraud that precipitated the ice presence in Minnesota, 458 00:31:38,840 --> 00:31:43,080 Speaker 2: that involved what enforcement advocates see as a systematic and 459 00:31:43,520 --> 00:31:47,320 Speaker 2: I certainly believe a systematic abuse of public assistance programs. 460 00:31:47,560 --> 00:31:50,640 Speaker 2: So rather than cooperating with federal efforts to address fraud 461 00:31:50,760 --> 00:31:54,320 Speaker 2: and immigration violations simultaneously, all the local guys are just 462 00:31:54,400 --> 00:31:59,880 Speaker 2: characterizing enforcement itself as that's the problem, that's the shiny object. 463 00:32:00,400 --> 00:32:03,040 Speaker 2: Oh look over here, they're enforcing things, and they're doing 464 00:32:03,120 --> 00:32:06,160 Speaker 2: it in a way that you know, anytime have you 465 00:32:06,200 --> 00:32:08,880 Speaker 2: ever been I don't know, maybe you never. Have you 466 00:32:08,960 --> 00:32:12,160 Speaker 2: ever seen somebody that's getting arrested in their resisting arrest. 467 00:32:12,560 --> 00:32:16,680 Speaker 3: It's not very pretty. No, it's lawful. 468 00:32:17,600 --> 00:32:22,080 Speaker 2: It's not very pretty. It's constitutional, and it's what keeps 469 00:32:22,160 --> 00:32:30,800 Speaker 2: our society intact lawful enforcement of the law. After three 470 00:32:30,880 --> 00:32:34,480 Speaker 2: hours of this, I hope to accomplish one simple thing. 471 00:32:35,880 --> 00:32:40,520 Speaker 2: You understand that what occurred in terms of self defense 472 00:32:41,480 --> 00:32:45,600 Speaker 2: absolutely lawful. And if you don't believe that, or you 473 00:32:45,640 --> 00:32:48,720 Speaker 2: are on the other side and you cannot see that, 474 00:32:49,400 --> 00:32:52,600 Speaker 2: I would encourage you to do what I've done. Rethink it, 475 00:32:52,880 --> 00:32:56,440 Speaker 2: rethink it, look at all of the available evidence, and 476 00:32:56,520 --> 00:32:58,880 Speaker 2: then maybe we all just sort of shut up and 477 00:32:58,960 --> 00:33:01,560 Speaker 2: just wait and see what they really determine.